Give 'em a brake (road worker safety)

[gismo]

I just read an editorial in Car and Drivel by Pat Bedard that challenges the "common wisdom" regarding increased fines and penalties for driving infractions in construction zones. Seems the statisticans are at it again providing the "facts" on the matter. Like the "one work-zone fatality every 8.5 hours" or three per day. Turns out that this frightening number includes a whole lot more than the mental image of an innocent worker knocked off by a careless driver. In fact it includes all fatalities such as drunk drivers running into a bridge when no workers were even on the job as well as a large number of accidents caused by the workers themselves. The article pointed out that in one multi year study, more construction workers were killed while being hit by construction vehicles than by other traffic.

He also pointed out that in Illinois where the fine for speeding in a construction zone is $375 (first offense) to $1000 and licence suspension (2nd offense), the state has been setting up "construction zone" signage in places where no work is being done just to increase the money collected (the higher fines apply whether or not work is being done and/or workers are present). This is in a state where "of the 39 work zone fatalities, only 2 were workers". And the final bit of unpleasant news is that the federal government is promoting all this with financial assistance. Your tax dollars at work.. creating more money for the government.

 

[SCCutler]

Lance, I am stunned that you would even suggest that politicos would misuse a law intended to promote safety, simply for the unsavory purposes of collecting revenue.

To quote M. Renault (Casablanca), "I am shocked, shocked to find that there is gambling in this establishment!"

This is right up there with insurance companies buying laser and radar guns for police departments; speeding (by itself) is rarely the cause of traffic accidents or deaths, and speed "traps" rarely serve any purpose other than revenue collection. Hence, insurance carriers are able to collect greater revenue (through higher rates because of points or tickets) without a concomitant increase in risk exposure.

If they really cared about road safety, they'd deal with improving right of way rule compliance (e.g., slower trafic keep right).

 

[wsuffa]

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

It'll be the same logic if anyone tries to reregulate air carriers.

Many times less regulation is better.

 

[mikea]

He also pointed out that in Illinois where the fine for speeding in a construction zone is $375 (first offense) to $1000 and licence suspension (2nd offense), the state has been setting up "construction zone" signage in places where no work is being done just to increase the money collected (the higher fines apply whether or not work is being done and/or workers are present). This is in a state where "of the 39 work zone fatalities, only 2 were workers". And the final bit of unpleasant news is that the federal government is promoting all this with financial assistance. Your tax dollars at work.. creating more money for the government.

It's more worser than that. Because they can't have enough troopers to nab EVERYONE who exceeds the work zone speed limit, they're going to set up radar cameras to catch you so they can mail out the tickets.

The more common danger is OBEYING the speed limit. You can easily get rear ended on a single lane area.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I sympathize with the actual worker, when they are actually out there. I've seen several instances of drivers that were distracted speeding into a work area with a flagman!! They just weren't watching.

What I don't sympathized with is work area signs beginning so far from where work is being done, that there is no relationship. Used to drive to see my sister in south Texas where there was work in progress for years along a two lane that was a main highway. There were signs beginning miles from where any actual work was being done. There was no work being done on Sunday or holidays, but the sighs were out and so were the troopers. State law changes to include the phrase 'when workers are present' but one wouldn't know where they were until they passed. So, that could help locals, but not those on a trip like I was.

Best,

Dave

 

[Richard]

In some work zones they reduce the speed limit below what it would be normally. Of course the one sign advising that is often hidden behind cautionary signs and/or is smaller than the std size. So a driver who slows to normal speed would still be speeding and the fine would be doubled.

I beat a speeding ticket for speeding in such a work zone. I presented to the judge a copy of the Notice of Completion signed by the project owner and pointed out that the date of the notice was previous to my alleged speeding. The officer stated the cones and signs still in place were evidence that the reduced limit was still in effect. I responded that it was negligent of the contractor to not remove the cones and signs, much like candidate signage not removed following an election. The judge agreed and it saved me a nick on me driving record, higher ins, and $765 fine.

The hwy project that takes the cake is the interchange connection up in the S.F. Bay area. I think it was the 680. For over 10 miles 3 lanes were reduced to 2 lanes which was really just one lane because a street sweeper would be randomly sweeping that lane adjacent to the closed lane. Mile after mile of cones until at last you came upon 3-8 men doing something under some bridge, 2 leaning on a shovel. This projected started when Reagan was Governor and finished in Wilson's 2nd term!

 

[Alan]

I've been in the roadside safety products business for a long time and I don;t have a customer who has been in business for any length of time that hasn't had an employee severly injured or killed. My guys were replacing a damaged crash cushion (www.sitesafeonline.com) and the replacement was hit while theywere installing it! Spend a day or two on a work zone and you'll slow down. I promise.

 

[Richard]

I've been in the roadside safety products business for a long time and I don;t have a customer who has been in business for any length of time that hasn't had an employee severly injured or killed. My guys were replacing a damaged crash cushion (www.sitesafeonline.com) and the replacement was hit while theywere installing it! Spend a day or two on a work zone and you'll slow down. I promise.

I hear you! But you don't have to be in a work zone, even an on ramp will suffice.

 

[gismo]

I've been in the roadside safety products business for a long time and I don;t have a customer who has been in business for any length of time that hasn't had an employee severly injured or killed. My guys were replacing a damaged crash cushion (www.sitesafeonline.com) and the replacement was hit while theywere installing it! Spend a day or two on a work zone and you'll slow down. I promise.

I have no problem slowing down and giving extra room when there are workers present, it's the notion that a state can increase their revenue stream by posting work zones where no work is being done and/or collecting big fines when no workers are present that bugs me. And IU don't like the government making it sound like a much bigger problem than it really is so they can get public acceptance for the heavy boot measures. Plus there's a big difference in the exposure to danger between a crew working alongside traffic on a crash barrier and a crew working on something else well behind a barrier.

 

[Alan]

I have no problem slowing down and giving extra room when there are workers present, it's the notion that a state can increase their revenue stream by posting work zones where no work is being done and/or collecting big fines when no workers are present that bugs me. And IU don't like the government making it sound like a much bigger problem than it really is so they can get public acceptance for the heavy boot measures. Plus there's a big difference in the exposure to danger between a crew working alongside traffic on a crash barrier and a crew working on something else well behind a barrier.

This is a continuing debate. I agree that going 55 mph when no one is working is silly. The contractors are worried about lawsuits, the workzones are thier responsibilty until the state accepts their work as complete, so they want everyone going as slowly as possible. Plus, they simply don't want to change the signing every time they start and stop work. And, they (the contractor) doesn't have the authority to change speed limits.

 

[robsingles]

Slightly connected to the road workers issue. I am a firefighter here in Florida and we have a new law called the "move over rule" which requires a driver to slow 20mph below the speed limit and/or move over a lane if you can for all emergency vehicles. To bad the motorists do not actually pay attention to the new rule, as I have seen emergency workers get hit, had a driver run right in to the back of the fire engine once. What really gets me is we will be working an auto accident and have a turn lane closed and drivers will get angry that they have to turn right and go down the road to U turn to go in the direction that they wish. Glad that in 8-9 months I will be in a sheriffs vehicle and able to issue citations to idiots. My rant over.

 

[SCCutler]

Slightly connected to the road workers issue. I am a firefighter here in Florida and we have a new law called the "move over rule" which requires a driver to slow 20mph below the speed limit and/or move over a lane if you can for all emergency vehicles. To bad the motorists do not actually pay attention to the new rule, as I have seen emergency workers get hit, had a driver run right in to the back of the fire engine once. What really gets me is we will be working an auto accident and have a turn lane closed and drivers will get angry that they have to turn right and go down the road to U turn to go in the direction that they wish. Glad that in 8-9 months I will be in a sheriffs vehicle and able to issue citations to idiots. My rant over.

Rob, Texas passed such a law recently as well; unfortunately, som eof the smaller PDs (the ones in towns which use traffic citations to generate most of their budget) started simply placing patrol cars on side of the road with no other purpose than to generate violations of the new statute.

Bad because it diminishes the legitimacy of the peace officers, and respect for the job they do.

I know peace officers who will not participate in such as that as a matter of dignity.

 

[mikea]

Slightly connected to the road workers issue. I am a firefighter here in Florida and we have a new law called the "move over rule" which requires a driver to slow 20mph below the speed limit and/or move over a lane if you can for all emergency vehicles. To bad the motorists do not actually pay attention to the new rule, as I have seen emergency workers get hit, had a driver run right in to the back of the fire engine once...

One contingency that's not in that law (which is a law I agree with, by the way) is .... You're riding with traffic at 70 (let's talk reality) and crest a hill to see the flashing lights on the right shoulder just 1/8 mile ahead... you are supposed to slow and move left into the lane that may not be clear, in mere seconds. You may end up having to brake heavily.

You have to hope that the other drivers around all realize what's up and you don't get rear ended. As has been discussed here the hope that everybody's paying attention is not one to bet on.

 

[gismo]

One contingency that's not in that law (which is a law I agree with, by the way) is .... You're riding with traffic at 70 (let's talk reality) and crest a hill to see the flashing lights on the right shoulder just 1/8 mile ahead... you are supposed to slow and move left into the lane that may not be clear, in mere seconds. You may end up having to brake heavily.

You have to hope that the other drivers around all realize what's up and you don't get rear ended. As has been discussed here the hope that everybody's paying attention is not one to bet on.

Seems like this is more likely to cause an accident than prevent one. I realize that patrol officers need some protection, but this sounds like a bad idea under some circumstances. It also seems likely to turn a regular traffic stop into a major traffic jam if this is on a highly travelled hiway.

 

[robsingles]

Seems like this is more likely to cause an accident than prevent one. I realize that patrol officers need some protection, but this sounds like a bad idea under some circumstances. It also seems likely to turn a regular traffic stop into a major traffic jam if this is on a highly travelled hiway.

Well it is Florida and we have limited hills so you can normally see emergency lights from a far distance. The majority of drivers do slow and move over for us. There is always that one that will race by us trying to get ahead of the other traffic. This is the driver that needs to be written a citation.

 

[Bill]

There is always that one that will race by us trying to get ahead of the other traffic. This is the driver that needs to be written a citation.

Mid 90's, heading to Killington for skiing, driving up VT7 late Friday night. Two lane road, posted at 50, running about 70. Got hit with instant on, trooper coming the other direction. By the time I pulled over, we were entering a town, and the speed limit had dropped to 35. The trooper had just taken my paperwork to his cruiser when a BMW went by so fast his wake violently shook both of our cars.

Trooper comes running back, literally throws my license, ins, etc., at me through the open window. "That guy just blew by me, with my lights on, at 78 in a 35 zone, who the hell does he think HE is??? This is your lucky day, Mr Jennings."

With that, he full ran back to his car, and with siren blaring and tires squealing, he took chase after that BMW. About 8 miles up the road, I see said BMW on the side of the road, with my trooper right behind him. I though of honking as I slowly went by, but decided not to tempt fate.

Sometimes life can be pretty darned funny!

 

[SkyHog]

Funny thing is that I don't think its the law here in New Mexico, but more often than not, I see people here move over for emergency vehicles.

Hey - we can't get the fast lane congenialites down (MOVE OVER!!!), but at least we got something right!

 

[SCCutler]

Funny thing is that I don't think its the law here in New Mexico, but more often than not, I see people here move over for emergency vehicles.

Hey - we can't get the fast lane congenialites down (MOVE OVER!!!), but at least we got something right!

Law or not, it is common sense and common courtesy (both, admittedly, not so common anymore) to move over. Even at a reduced speed, having traffic go by five feet away is still (at best) unnerving.

I am amazed when there is an emergency vehicle on the shoulder (or, for that matter, someone who is changing a tire, looking uder the hood, whatever), I signal to get into the left lane, and some nimrod tries to preclude me from getting over. Remarkable.

 

[MSmith]

Slightly connected to the road workers issue. I am a firefighter here in Florida and we have a new law called the "move over rule" which requires a driver to slow 20mph below the speed limit and/or move over a lane if you can for all emergency vehicles. To bad the motorists do not actually pay attention to the new rule, as I have seen emergency workers get hit, had a driver run right in to the back of the fire engine once. What really gets me is we will be working an auto accident and have a turn lane closed and drivers will get angry that they have to turn right and go down the road to U turn to go in the direction that they wish. Glad that in 8-9 months I will be in a sheriffs vehicle and able to issue citations to idiots. My rant over.

I don't suggest that you would do this, but ....

It really frosts my cookies to see a police car driving down the right shoulder of a traffic jam, only to turn off his lights and pull into traffic at the end. This traffic jam is there every morning, and it's clear that the officer is just trying to avoid sitting in traffic.

These are unmarked cars commuting to the state capital like the rest of us.

 

[SkyHog]

I don't suggest that you would do this, but ....

It really frosts my cookies to see a police car driving down the right shoulder of a traffic jam, only to turn off his lights and pull into traffic at the end. This traffic jam is there every morning, and it's clear that the officer is just trying to avoid sitting in traffic.

These are unmarked cars commuting to the state capital like the rest of us.

Similar thing upsets me to no end. Sitting at a red light, cop drives up, stops, turns on his lights, and goes through, only to turn them off and drive leisurely down the road.

UGH! I used to call and report it everytime, but then the copline people would just say "He must have been on his way to an emergency" and dismiss it.

 

[Lance F]

Warning: Thread creep...
This one started with Lance's reference to a Patrick Bedard column in this month's Car & Driver. How many of you guys read C&D? Me, since high school in 1965! Been a subscriber most of that time.

 

[gismo]

There is always that one that will race by us trying to get ahead of the other traffic. This is the driver that needs to be written a citation.

Agreed. Whether or not traffic vacates the nearest lane, all drivers proceeding past any car pulled off the road with people outside (or about to exit the vehicle) should exercise "extreme caution". It's the squeezing of all traffic from two lanes to one that I think may be counterproductive safety wise.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Lance:

It's just a matter of time until driving will be taken over by computers and engineers. All one has to do is look at the errant driving, inefficiency and lack of attention.

No matter what the traffic engineers design; drivers not paying attention or not caring defeats design every time. It took me two years to get a city traffic engineer to approve a median location. Folks from my subdivision would be pulling out onto a six lane divided road where folks from the east would be coming over a hill. We went around and around about sight distances at different speeds for different vehicles. Then, we got into the same discussions for night time ops. Height of oncoming vehicles' headlights above the ground. We met all criteria for a vehicle coming over a hill at the speed limit. Then, the city wanted design for X miles over the speed limit at night--which would effectively preclude development of our site. It actually went as far as a vehicle coming over the hill 12 miles over the speed limit at night with the driver impaired!!

In the city's defense, they had been sued and lost cases where drivers were speeding because the intersection wasn't designed for what people actually do v. what the speed limit stated. When courts do this, it means there are no rules designers can follow.

In the end, we will lose the freedom we now have to individually drive the way we do in the name of safety and efficiency.

We spend millions of dollars a year; maybe billions trying to compensate for people that don't care, don't pay attention and don't think it matters. It's gotta change.

(End of rant)

Don't ask me about decel lanes we install that people don't use; lazy vehicle drivers that turn across six lanes at a six lane intersection when they're supposed to turn into the closest lane to the left so others can turn right. And, the constant red light runners I see almost daily.

Dave

 

[flyingcheesehead]

It's just a matter of time until driving will be taken over by computers and engineers. All one has to do is look at the errant driving, inefficiency and lack of attention.

I sure hope you're right Dave, but unfortunately the citizens of the USA believe it is their god-given right to be able to drive! Look at all the folks who drive without licenses. Look at all the old people who are still on the road (I had one of them come up the off-ramp straight at me a couple of months ago, I was tempted to hit her just hard enough that we'd have to call the cops so they could have a chance to get her off the road!) Look at the number of people who don't use public transportation that would be far more economical for them.

In the end, we will lose the freedom we now have to individually drive the way we do in the name of safety and efficiency.

Honestly... That may be a good thing. I see an awful lot of idiocy out on the road. I've come to expect it, and I am pleasantly surprised when someone actually drives well.

Don't ask me about decel lanes we install that people don't use; lazy vehicle drivers that turn across six lanes at a six lane intersection when they're supposed to turn into the closest lane to the left so others can turn right. And, the constant red light runners I see almost daily.

And those folks who pull in front of trucks and slam on their brakes. And those people who pull right next to you when you turn your turn signal on, or they're already next to you and ignore it. And, speaking of turn signals... Why is it that all these $50,000 SUV's don't seem to come equipped with them?!?

Sigh.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Seems like this is more likely to cause an accident than prevent one. I realize that patrol officers need some protection, but this sounds like a bad idea under some circumstances. It also seems likely to turn a regular traffic stop into a major traffic jam if this is on a highly travelled hiway.

Lance,

The worst traffic jams caused by officers are caused by the patrol cars *without* a "customer" in front of them as everyone hits the brakes. Luckily, most officers seem to be smart enough not to make stops where they would cause a traffic jam.

I do think the law is necessary, however. If you've never done it, stand on the side of an interstate highway and watch the traffic go by. You never really realize how much energy vehicles have when they're moving that fast until you do that. Now, add in the quickly increasing number of officers being injured in this manner and the amount of distracted driving going on these days (cell phones added to the usual makeup/newspaper/etc. crowd) and you have a formula for a lot of dead officers.

The amount of idiocy on the road seems to be increasing exponentially. As much as I drive, you'd think I'd have seen it all by now. Unfortunately, something new makes me shake my head every day.

(110,000+ miles driven this year and counting!)

 

[gkainz]

... I was tempted to hit her just hard enough that we'd have to call the cops so they could have a chance to get her off the road!...

There's a list of "Huh?" statements made to insurance companies regarding accidents...I can see this one in that list.

"The other driver looked like she was way too old to be driving, so I hit her just hard enough to have the cops take her license away."

One I recall - "The pedestrian couldn't make up his mind which way to go, so I hit him."

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Well, couple days ago in the paper, a lady drove through a rail intersection when the gates were down. Flashing lights, gate down, she looked and saw a train coming from one direction and never looked the other way. Zoomed around the gate right in front of a train coming at high speed the other way. She and her young daughter were killed at the scene.

The Dallas Morning News carried the story and the entire tone was it was the City of Grand Prairie's fault for not putting up gates that the driver couldn't go around!!

What tripe! The city has completed one upgrade after another over the years because people just won't stop killing themselves on RR tracks. Where does this end?

I have crossed through gates that weren't down after carefully checking. They don't always work properly!! Now, we all get to sit when gates are inoperative because a few folks can't use reasonable judgement! Not to mention the cost to the city's taxpayers.

I just don't get this stuff!

Dave

 

[Keith Lane]

The Dallas Morning News carried the story and the entire tone was it was the City of Grand Prairie's fault for not putting up gates that the driver couldn't go around!!

What tripe! The city has completed one upgrade after another over the years because people just won't stop killing themselves on RR tracks. Where does this end?

Dave

GRRRRRRR..............
Oh well, this is the very thing, tragc as it is that make my house payent every month. Frivolous litigation in these accidents is just another industry. I guarantee you someone will sue that big, mean (and rich) railroad for not caring enough about her to have prevented this in some way. It will take a couple of years to become a suit but it will be one.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

"Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for."

- Will Rogers

 

[tparsons]

I am a Land Surveyor and have had plenty of "opportunity" to work in and around highways and streets. Most of you would never believe the things I've seen people do while people are working nearby - even when they are directed to slow down by a flagger. I have had several friends with near hits, and know of several others who have been hit.

Surveyors and construction workers in highway rights of way have a very high injury and fatality rate because many people WILL NOT slow down to a reasonable speed, and are frequently not paying attention to their driving.

Whatever it takes to make people wake up or get them off the roads is fine with me. I'm tired of being missed by inches by a car travelling 40 mph or more because the driver is too "important" to care about other's safety.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Wow Mike!

I don't know what these folks are thinking. As a developer, I often install streets. Until the city accepts them, they are mine--I OWN them. One day I was out with a crew doing a walk through and watched a young lady pull up in a shinny Lexus, get out of the car and start moving a road block. I walked over and asked her what she was doing. She said the road block was in the way and was moving it. I told her this was private property and the sign was there for a reason. She said 'everyone else is doing this; why should I have to go around'. I told her I would call the police if she'd like to settle this with them. She stomped back to her car, turned around and spun the tires as she left.

Now, if she drove through and caused damage (the streets were new), I would have to absorb it. If she got hurt, guess who would pay. But, I'm supposed to let her drive through because she doesnt' want to go around?

Dave

 

[gismo]

Wow Mike!

I don't know what these folks are thinking. As a developer, I often install streets. Until the city accepts them, they are mine--I OWN them. One day I was out with a crew doing a walk through and watched a young lady pull up in a shinny Lexus, get out of the car and start moving a road block. I walked over and asked her what she was doing. She said the road block was in the way and was moving it. I told her this was private property and the sign was there for a reason. She said 'everyone else is doing this; why should I have to go around'. I told her I would call the police if she'd like to settle this with them. She stomped back to her car, turned around and spun the tires as she left.

Now, if she drove through and caused damage (the streets were new), I would have to absorb it. If she got hurt, guess who would pay. But, I'm supposed to let her drive through because she doesnt' want to go around?

Dave

To way too many people, what's "right" is whatever they think is best for them and them only. I'm sure we're all a bit guilty of this kind of thinking now and then, but some folks eventually learn to consider that others exist in the world. Her behavior is pretty consistent with the folks who move in to and/or build houses areas close to airports and then demand that the airports be closed or constrained to the point that they might as well be closed.

 

[tom.]

Whatever it takes to make people wake up or get them off the roads is fine with me. I'm tired of being missed by inches by a car travelling 40 mph or more because the driver is too "important" to care about other's safety.

Me too. I'm dam tired of feeling like the bad guy for obeying the law. I hope they all get tickets. Or worse if they hurt a worker.